Megan Thee Stallion received powerful legal support yesterday when Clare Locke LLP asked a federal court for permission to file arguments backing her effort to restore a jury’s defamation ruling against blogger Milagro Gramz.
The Houston rapper won her case against Gramz in December, but a judge later threw out the defamation portion of the verdict. Now Clare Locke wants to help her get it back.
Clare Locke told the Southern District of Florida court that Milagro Gramz doesn’t deserve the same legal protections given to real journalists. The law firm said Florida’s retraction statute only covers actual media members who publish content to “further the free dissemination of information or disinterested and neutral commentary.”
Gramz testified she’s an “entertainer,” not a journalist. The jury also found she didn’t “impartially disseminate information” or “provide disinterested and neutral commentary,” according to Clare Locke’s filing.
The law firm explained why it decided to jump into Megan’s legal battle. Clare Locke said its clients regularly suffer “catastrophic reputational harm” from false claims that spread faster than victims can clear their names on social media.
Applying Florida’s retraction law to Milagro Gramz would set a dangerous precedent, Clare Locke argued. The firm said this “would compel many victims of defamation to subject themselves to more defamation as a precondition to seeking justice in court.”
Clare Locke pointed out that influencers like Gramz often use retraction demands to double down on their attacks. This puts defamation victims in an impossible spot – either stay quiet or fight expensive court battles where the odds are stacked against them.
The firm drew sharp distinctions between traditional media and online influencers. Real journalists follow ethics codes and employ legal teams to avoid publishing false information, Clare Locke wrote. But bloggers and influencers just want to “garner attention and clicks as quickly as possible regardless of the truth.”
Megan Thee Stallion and her legal team are seeking to restore the $16,000 jury award that was vacated when the judge dismissed the defamation count.